Mahesh Chunnilal Soni, Nagpur V. Income Tax Officer Ward -3(3), Nagpur

ITA 79/NAG/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 84666 (ITAT-NAGPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 4 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-09-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 13-04-2011
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NINAWE
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Additional evidence
• Section: 68; 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR BEFORE SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIVEK VARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ITA NO.79/NAG/2011 ( AY: 2007 - 2008 ) MAHESH CHUNNILALSONI, MANOJ G MORYANI, ADVOCATE, 1 ST FLOR, SUDAMABHAVAN, NEAR SUT MARKET, GANDHIBAGH, NAGPUR. / VS. ITO - WARD 3(3), NAGPUR. ./ PAN: AHFPS 7548 P ( / APPELLANT) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI MANOJ MORYANI / RESPONDENTBY : SHRI NINAWE, JCIT / DATE OF HEARING : 11.09.2014 / DATE OF PR ONOUNCEMENT : 12 .09.2014 / O R D E R PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 13.4.2011 IS AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) - II, NAGPUR DATED 27.1.2011 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007 - 2008. 2. AT THE OUTSET, BOTH THE PARTIES CONCORD WITH THE PROPOSAL THAT THE LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSESSMENT IN THE PRESENT CASE WAS COMPLETED U/S 144 O F THE ACT ON 31.3.2007 DETERMINING THE ASSESSED INCOME AT RS. 30,69,100/ - AGAINST THE RETURNED INCOME OF RS. 1,04,600/ - . AO MADE VARIOUS ADDITIONS U/S 68 OF THE ACT AFTER RELYING ON THE CASH DEPOSITS IN THE BANK ACCOUNT. NONE PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASS ESSEE THEREFORE, THE BEST JUDGMENT ASSESSMENT WAS RESORTED BY THE AO INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 144 OF THE ACT. MATTER TRAVELLED TO THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. 3. DURING THE FIRST APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS, ASSESSEE SUBMITTED VARIOUS DETAILS BUT UN FORTUNATELY THESE DOCUMENTS WERE NOT ADMITTED BY THE CIT (A) INVOKING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 46 A OF THE IT RULES. ACCORDINGLY, CIT (A) SUSTAINED THE ADDITIONS AND THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS DISMISSED. 2 DURING THE PROCEEDINGS BEFORE US, LD COUNSEL FO R THE ASSESSEE DEMONSTRATED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS PREVENTED FROM ATTENDING TO THE HEARING NOTICED BY THE AO THEREFORE, HE SEEKS DIRECTION FROM THE TRIBUNAL TO ADMIT THE ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES FURNISHED BEFORE THE CIT (A) AND ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE AFRESH BY TH E AO. 4. ON THE OTHER HAND, LD DR RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE REVENUE AUTHORITIES. 5. ON HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES, WE FIND, IT IS A CASE OF NON - ADMITTANCE OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES AND NON - REMANDING THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO. IN THE PROCESS, IT COSTS VIOLATION TO THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. IT IS NOT THE CASE OF THE REVENUE THA T THE SAID ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES ARE BOGUS IN NATURE. THEREFORE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE AO SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO EXAMINE THE SAID ADDITIONAL EVIDENCES WHICH WILL BE FILED BY THE ASSESSEE BEFORE THE AO. LD COUNSEL FOR TH E ASSESSEE MADE A STATEMENT AT BAR THAT HE SHALL ATTEND AND COMPLY WITH THE PROCEEDINGS BY THE AO. WE ACCORDINGLY ORDER FOR REMANDING ALL THE GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO ADJUDICATE THE ISSUES AFRESH AFTER CONSIDERING THE SAID A DDITIONAL EVIDENCES AND AFTER AFFORDING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE. ACCORDINGLY, GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES . ORDER PRONOU NCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12 TH SEPTEMBER, 2014. SD/ - SD/ - (VIVEK VARMA) (D. KARUNAKARA RAO) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER NAGPUR ; 12 /09/2014 . . ./ OKK , SR. PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 4. / CIT 5. , / DR, ITAT, 3 NAGPUR. 6. / GUARD FILE . //TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, ( SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY) / ITAT, NAGPUR